Literature DB >> 23790771

Linear energy transfer-guided optimization in intensity modulated proton therapy: feasibility study and clinical potential.

Drosoula Giantsoudi1, Clemens Grassberger, David Craft, Andrzej Niemierko, Alexei Trofimov, Harald Paganetti.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility and potential clinical benefit of linear energy transfer (LET) guided plan optimization in intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multicriteria optimization (MCO) module was used to generate a series of Pareto-optimal IMPT base plans (BPs), corresponding to defined objectives, for 5 patients with head-and-neck cancer and 2 with pancreatic cancer. A Monte Carlo platform was used to calculate dose and LET distributions for each BP. A custom-designed MCO navigation module allowed the user to interpolate between BPs to produce deliverable Pareto-optimal solutions. Differences among the BPs were evaluated for each patient, based on dose-volume and LET-volume histograms and 3-dimensional distributions. An LET-based relative biological effectiveness (RBE) model was used to evaluate the potential clinical benefit when navigating the space of Pareto-optimal BPs.
RESULTS: The mean LET values for the target varied up to 30% among the BPs for the head-and-neck patients and up to 14% for the pancreatic cancer patients. Variations were more prominent in organs at risk (OARs), where mean LET values differed by a factor of up to 2 among the BPs for the same patient. An inverse relation between dose and LET distributions for the OARs was typically observed. Accounting for LET-dependent variable RBE values, a potential improvement on RBE-weighted dose of up to 40%, averaged over several structures under study, was noticed during MCO navigation.
CONCLUSIONS: We present a novel strategy for optimizing proton therapy to maximize dose-averaged LET in tumor targets while simultaneously minimizing dose-averaged LET in normal tissue structures. MCO BPs show substantial LET variations, leading to potentially significant differences in RBE-weighted doses. Pareto-surface navigation, using both dose and LET distributions for guidance, provides the means for evaluating a large variety of deliverable plans and aids in identifying the clinically optimal solution.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23790771      PMCID: PMC4520412          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.05.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  8 in total

1.  CERR: a computational environment for radiotherapy research.

Authors:  Joseph O Deasy; Angel I Blanco; Vanessa H Clark
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Range uncertainty in proton therapy due to variable biological effectiveness.

Authors:  Alejandro Carabe; Maryam Moteabbed; Nicolas Depauw; Jan Schuemann; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Dose to water versus dose to medium in proton beam therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  An approach for practical multiobjective IMRT treatment planning.

Authors:  David Craft; Tarek Halabi; Helen A Shih; Thomas Bortfeld
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-10-24       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  TOPAS: an innovative proton Monte Carlo platform for research and clinical applications.

Authors:  J Perl; J Shin; J Schumann; B Faddegon; H Paganetti
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  A model for the relative biological effectiveness of protons: the tissue specific parameter α/β of photons is a predictor for the sensitivity to LET changes.

Authors:  Minna Wedenberg; Bengt K Lind; Björn Hårdemark
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 4.089

7.  Variations in linear energy transfer within clinical proton therapy fields and the potential for biological treatment planning.

Authors:  Clemens Grassberger; Alexei Trofimov; Anthony Lomax; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-12-14       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Relative biological effectiveness (RBE) values for proton beam therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti; Andrzej Niemierko; Marek Ancukiewicz; Leo E Gerweck; Michael Goitein; Jay S Loeffler; Herman D Suit
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2002-06-01       Impact factor: 7.038

  8 in total
  39 in total

1.  Analysis of the track- and dose-averaged LET and LET spectra in proton therapy using the geant4 Monte Carlo code.

Authors:  Fada Guan; Christopher Peeler; Lawrence Bronk; Changran Geng; Reza Taleei; Sharmalee Randeniya; Shuaiping Ge; Dragan Mirkovic; David Grosshans; Radhe Mohan; Uwe Titt
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 2.  Robust Proton Treatment Planning: Physical and Biological Optimization.

Authors:  Jan Unkelbach; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 5.934

3.  Intensity modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  H M Kooy; C Grassberger
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Proton RBE dependence on dose in the setting of hypofractionation.

Authors:  Thomas Friedrich
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-08-28       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 5.  Treatment planning for proton therapy: what is needed in the next 10 years?

Authors:  Hakan Nystrom; Maria Fuglsang Jensen; Petra Witt Nystrom
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Extension of TOPAS for the simulation of proton radiation effects considering molecular and cellular endpoints.

Authors:  Lisa Polster; Jan Schuemann; Ilaria Rinaldi; Lucas Burigo; Aimee L McNamara; Robert D Stewart; Andrea Attili; David J Carlson; Tatsuhiko Sato; José Ramos Méndez; Bruce Faddegon; Joseph Perl; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Linear energy transfer incorporated intensity modulated proton therapy optimization.

Authors:  Wenhua Cao; Azin Khabazian; Pablo P Yepes; Gino Lim; Falk Poenisch; David R Grosshans; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Physical parameter optimization scheme for radiobiological studies of charged particle therapy.

Authors:  Changran Geng; Drake Gates; Lawrence Bronk; Duo Ma; Fada Guan
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 2.685

9.  Recent developments and comprehensive evaluations of a GPU-based Monte Carlo package for proton therapy.

Authors:  Nan Qin; Pablo Botas; Drosoula Giantsoudi; Jan Schuemann; Zhen Tian; Steve B Jiang; Harald Paganetti; Xun Jia
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  The TOPAS tool for particle simulation, a Monte Carlo simulation tool for physics, biology and clinical research.

Authors:  Bruce Faddegon; José Ramos-Méndez; Jan Schuemann; Aimee McNamara; Jungwook Shin; Joseph Perl; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 2.685

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.